Skip to main content
· 9/15/1877

Howe Machine Co. v. Rosine

Citations

  • 87 Ill. 105

Syllabus

<p>1. Evidence—relevancy—cost of machine sold. In a suit upon a note given - for the price of a sewing machine, where the evidence was conflicting as to the issues of fact, in respect to the matter of the consideration of the note, it was held erroneous to allow the defendant to prove the wholesale cost of such a machine.</p> <p>2. Error—when obviated by instruction. An error in the admission of evidence is not obviated by an instruction to disregard such evidence, unless the case is such that it clearly appears no injustice or wrong has been done to the party complaining.</p> <p>3. Sale—right to rescind. If an old machine is sold as a new one, and the vendor agrees to substitute certain parts of the machine by others, which he fails to do, the purchaser may rescind the sale by offering to return the machine and demanding his note given for the price.</p>

Judges: Dickey

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.